What's this?

commandlinefu.com is the place to record those command-line gems that you return to again and again.

Delete that bloated snippets file you've been using and share your personal repository with the world.
That way others can gain from your CLI wisdom and you from theirs too. All commands can be commented on, discussed and
voted up or down.

Stay in the loop…

Follow the Tweets.

Every new command is wrapped in a tweet and posted
to Twitter. Following the stream is a great way of staying abreast of the latest commands. For the more discerning,
there are Twitter accounts for commands that get a minimum of 3 and 10 votes - that way only the great commands get tweeted.

This improves on #9892 by compressing the directory on the remote machine so that the amount of data transferred over the network is much smaller. The command uses ssh(1) to get to a remote host, uses tar(1) to archive and compress a remote directory, prints the result to STDOUT, which is written to a local file. In other words, we are archiving and compressing a remote directory to our local box.

The command uses ssh(1) to get to a remote host, uses tar(1) to archive a remote directory, prints the result to STDOUT, which is piped to gzip(1) to compress to a local file. In other words, we are archiving and compressing a remote directory to our local box.

Know a better way?

What others think

Both solutions get the same result, but the firstone tries to minimize the bandwith usage, which should be an advantage at a slow network connection. The price fro that ist to squeeze out the cpu performance in two ways: ssh encryption and compressing.

The second solution needs more bandwith but use less cpu power, because the local host will compress the tarfile.

As often this is a tradeof between networkbandwith and cpu power. It depends also on the content of the tarfile, if it's compressable or not.

Definitely another way to get at the same result. However, OpenSSH (and other SSH implementations) support compression in the SSH connection. So, you can get the benefit of not burning the remote CPU (although you're using compression for the connection, you're not for both the connection and the archive simultaneously), and still minimize data transferred on the wire. Either way works.